DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, and 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takagi (US 2021/0107359).
Regarding claim 1, Takagi discloses a driver assist apparatus comprising one or more processors 90 configured to collectively provide instructions of settings with group (figures 10A-10B), the settings being set to driver assist functions included in the group, and the group being configured so that the driver assist function of a vehicle is allowed to be added to or deleted from the group (Bt1, Bt2, Bt3), wherein a plurality of the driver assist functions (Function A, Function B-Function E) included in the group, to which the instructions are provided, is a driver assist function group including at least a function concerned with alert in a case where the vehicle approaches an obstacle and a function concerned with detection of a stationary object around when parking (paragraphs 8, 16, and 247).
Regarding claim 2, Takagi discloses wherein the driver assist function group further includes any one or more of a function concerned with automatic parking assist (p. 134), a function concerned with control to suppress sudden acceleration, a function concerned with approaching vehicle alert (p. 136), a function that assists in ensuring safety when getting off the vehicle, and a function concerned with assist when driving at an intersection.
Regarding claim 10, Takagi discloses wherein, the one or more processors are configured to display descriptions of functions included in a predetermined group and predetermined setting information assigned to the predetermined group, when the predetermined group including the driver assist function group is selected in a setting screen of setting to the driver assist functions included in the group (figures 10A-10B).
Regarding claim 11, Takagi discloses wherein, when a predetermined group including the driver assist function group is selected in a setting screen of setting to the driver assist functions included in the group, the one or more processors are configured to: display a list of a driver assist function (A, B, C, D) concerned with parking assist and included in the driver assist function group; and change a detailed function of the driver assist function concerned with parking assist (figures 10A-10B).
Regarding claim 12, Takagi discloses a driver assist method executed by a computer 90, the driver assist method comprising:
collectively providing instructions of settings with group, the settings being set to driver assist functions included in the group (figures 10A-10B), and the group being configured so that the driver assist function of a vehicle is allowed to be added to or deleted from the group (Bt1, Bt2, Bt3); and
executing the instructions, wherein a plurality of the driver assist functions (Function A, Function B-Function E) included in the group, to which the instructions are provided, is to a driver assist function group including at least a function concerned with alert in a case where the vehicle approaches an obstacle and a function concerned with detection of a stationary object around when parking (p. 8, p.16, and p.247).
Regarding claim 13, Takagi discloses a non-transitory storage medium storing instructions that are executable by one or more processors 90 and that cause the one or more processors to perform functions comprising:
collectively providing instructions of settings with group (figures 10A-10B), the settings being set to driver assist functions included in the group, and the group being configured so that the driver assist function of a vehicle is allowed to be added to or deleted from the group (Bt1, Bt2, Bt3); and
executing the instructions, wherein a plurality of the driver assist functions (Function A, Function B-Function E) included in the group, to which the instructions are provided, is a driver assist function group including at least a function concerned with alert in a case where the vehicle approaches an obstacle and a function concerned with detection of a stationary object around when parking (p. 8, p.16, and p.247).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takagi in view of Takahashi (US 2020/0167045).
Regarding claims 3-5, Takagi discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose a function concerned with collision avoidance assist and a function concerned with lane departure suppression assist (claim 3); an instruction to change a timing of activation of the driver assist function (claim 4); when the settings include changing the timing of activation of each of two or more of the driver assist functions, the one or more processors being configured to set such that the timing of activation of another one of the driver assist functions, different from the driver assist functions of which the timings of activation are set to be changed, is changed; and the instructions being instructions to collectively change the timings of activation (claim 5).
Takahashi teaches the use of a function concerned with collision avoidance assist (p. 91) and a function concerned with lane departure suppression assist (p. 92, figure 8); an instruction to change a timing of activation of a driver assist function (p. 91); when settings include changing the timing of activation of each of two or more of the driver assist functions, one or more processors being configured to set such that the timing of activation of another one of the driver assist functions, different from the driver assist functions of which the timings of activation are set to be changed, is changed (p. 91); and instructions being instructions to collectively change the timings of activation (p. 91). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a function concerned with collision avoidance assist and a function concerned with lane departure suppression assist; an instruction to change a timing of activation of the driver assist function; when the settings include changing the timing of activation of each of two or more of the driver assist functions, the one or more processors being configured to set such that the timing of activation of another one of the driver assist functions, different from the driver assist functions of which the timings of activation are set to be changed, is changed; and the instructions being instructions to collectively change the timings of activation to the apparatus of Takagi as taught by Takahashi for the purpose of effectively assisting a driver to monitor surroundings of a vehicle.
Claim(s) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takagi in view of Long (US 2020/0409362).
Regarding claims 6-9, Takagi discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose an instruction to change an alarm sound to a user of the driver assist function (claim 6); when the settings include changing the alarm sound of each of two or more of the driver assist functions, the one or more processors being configured to set such that the alarm sound of another one of the driver assist functions, different from the driver assist functions of which the alarm sounds are set to be changed, is changed; and the instructions being instructions to collectively change the alarm sounds (claim 7); an instruction to change an operating intensity of the driver assist function (claim 8); when the settings include changing the operating intensity of each of two or more of the driver assist functions, the one or more processors being configured to set such that the operating intensity of another one of the driver assist functions, different from the driver assist functions of which the operating intensities are set to be changed, is changed; and the instructions being instructions to collectively change the operating intensities (claim 9).
Long teaches the use of an instruction to change an alarm sound to a user of a driver assist function (p. 29); when settings include changing the alarm sound of each of two or more of the driver assist functions, one or more processors being configured to set such that the alarm sound of another one of the driver assist functions, different from the driver assist functions of which the alarm sounds are set to be changed, is changed; and the instructions being instructions to collectively change the alarm sounds (p. 29); an instruction to change an operating intensity of the driver assist function (p.29); when the settings include changing the operating intensity of each of two or more of the driver assist functions, the one or more processors being configured to set such that the operating intensity of another one of the driver assist functions, different from the driver assist functions of which the operating intensities are set to be changed, is changed; and the instructions being instructions to collectively change the operating intensities (p. 29). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an instruction to change an alarm sound to a user of the driver assist function; when the settings include changing the alarm sound of each of two or more of the driver assist functions, the one or more processors being configured to set such that the alarm sound of another one of the driver assist functions, different from the driver assist functions of which the alarm sounds are set to be changed, is changed; and the instructions being instructions to collectively change the alarm sounds; an instruction to change an operating intensity of the driver assist function; when the settings include changing the operating intensity of each of two or more of the driver assist functions, the one or more processors being configured to set such that the operating intensity of another one of the driver assist functions, different from the driver assist functions of which the operating intensities are set to be changed, is changed; and the instructions being instructions to collectively change the operating intensities to the apparatus of Takagi as taught by Long for the purpose of effectively providing a plurality of indications.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dasher, Murata, and Mills disclose driver assist systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH V LA whose telephone number is (571)272-2970. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANH V LA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
ANH V. LA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2685
Al
June 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights